Organic Semiconductor-Based Photoelectrochemical Cells for Efficient Solar-to-Chemical Conversion
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript aims to review the organic semiconductors applied as photoelectrodes for solar-to-chemical conversion, such as the evolution of H2 and H2O2. Discussions about this topic is based on single-component and bulk-heterojunction of the organics. The review is comprehensive, while it still needs to be improved. Several comments are listed as follows.
(1) In Page 2, inorganic semiconductors are briefly introduced, identified as the materials “almost reaching their theoretical performance limits, with their intrinsic potential for performance still significantly lower than the commercialized level of PEC technology”. While the advantages of organic semiconductors in the mentioned aspects are not clearly illustrated.
(2) The organic semiconductors are stated with several advantages when constructing PEC cells (Page 31, Line 1150-1152). Among the listed advantages, it may be true for “tunability of band positions and band gaps”. While I don’t think the organics would exhibit “superior charge-transfer properties”, or be “low-cost materials and simple fabrication methods”, when compared with most inorganic semiconductors.
(3) Page 8, the origin behind the improved performance is not clearly illustrated when organic photoelectrodes are loaded with cocatalysts. It’ll be helpful to supplement with a comparative introduction between the inorganic and organic systems where cocatalysts are both included.
(4) Page 5, Line 194, the subtitle number should be 2.3.
(5) Typos of the text should be carefully checked, such as “The Li et al” in Page 26, Line 979.
Typos of the text should be carefully checked.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This review is an excellent summary of recent advances in organic semiconductor-based photoelectrodes for organic transformations. The topic is important, and the content and references are up-to-date. I highly recommend this review to be accepted in Catalysts and I believe the readers will enjoy reading this like I do. The only suggestion is that one might find the conclusion section to be lengthy. Can the authors shorten this section?
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In this paper Je Min Yu and Ji-Wook Jang reviewed recent progress in the photoelectrochemical cells. This manuscript is a nicely written and well addressed review article. Review looks complete, relevant articles cited. In my opinion, the English language of the article is correct, no major or minor edits are required. The present work makes significant contribution for the readership of the journal and specialists working in the field of organic electronics and should be accepted to publication after minor revision.
1. I didn’t understand, the authors of the article made the schemes for the review, or they are quoted from the original sources. If it is possible to make corrections to the schemes, then in Figure 1c it is worth increasing the size of the structural formula and making the background transparent.
2. It would be nice to add structural formulas to other Figures, as not everyone can easily remember the structure of the polymer by name. For example, Figure 12 (PEDOT:PSS and PTB7-Th/EH-IDTBR) and Figure 14 (Y6:PM6) and further in the text. The structural formulas can be presented on a separate scheme in each chapter of the review
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
